1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. On June 15, 2016, the National Labor Relations Commission between the Plaintiff and the Intervenor joining the Defendant.

1. The contents to be stated in this part of the decision on reexamination of this case are the same as the contents indicated in the part other than the fact that the second 10 of the decision on reexamination of this case’s case’s “the grounds for the decision on reexamination of this case’s case’s case’s 1.1.” as an intervenor’s “the defendant”. As such, the part is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act

2. Whether the decision on the retrial of this case is lawful

A. The summary of the parties' assertion 1) The plaintiff consented to the application of the wage peak system under the premise that the plaintiff extends the retirement age, and the plaintiff also extends the plaintiff's retirement age as a result of the application of the wage peak system to the plaintiff, but the notice of this case, which the plaintiff retired on December 31, 2015, which was the plaintiff's original retirement age, constitutes an unfair dismissal. Therefore, the decision of the reexamination of this case, which did not accept the plaintiff's request for remedy against unfair dismissal, should be revoked illegally. 2) The defendant and the intervenor of the intervenor separates the wage peak system from the wage peak system review and the extension of retirement age, so even if the wage peak system is applied

However, since the Plaintiff rejected the Intervenor’s retirement age extension review, the instant notice merely informing the Plaintiff of the grounds for ipso facto retirement, it cannot be deemed unfair dismissal.

Therefore, we cannot accept the plaintiff's assertion premiseding that the notice of this case is unfair.

(b)If there is no dispute between the parties to the facts of recognition or if each entry in Eul-B or in evidence Nos. 1 to 4, 25, 26 added the purport of the entire pleadings, the following facts may be recognized:

Article 52 (Extension of Age Limit and Re-employment) (3) Where an application for extension of age limit is made under the premise of application of the wage peak system at the arrival of the age of 53 among the employees of Grade III or lower, the retirement age may be extended by one year until the age of 58 after deliberation by the personnel committee.

1. The intervenor's personnel management rules.